Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 160
  1. #101  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    I have a real sore spot for misuse of the term "jihad".
    Okay,you have my curiosity. How, in the context that is used in(a joke), a misuse of the term?
  2. #102  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    I have a real sore spot for misuse of the term "jihad".
    I have a real sore spot for the use of Jihad...


    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  3. #103  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    I have a real sore spot for the use of Jihad...


    You Da Man!!
  4.    #104  
    Whoops. My apologies. I knee jerk posted. I was actually thinking about the term, "intifada".
  5. #105  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Whoops. My apologies. I knee jerk posted. I was actually thinking about the term, "intifada".

    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  6. #106  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Whoops. My apologies. I knee jerk posted. I was actually thinking about the term, "intifada".
    So, let me make sure I understand what your trying to say. Since the people in that part of the world could not get along, The US had to be attacked? (according to some of their beliefs)
  7. #107  
    Liberals are puzzies. Rove didn't go far enough.

    Slim Shady, what flavor is your kool aid? Yes many Dems okayed the war's, but have been undermining it ever since . Check any paper for 'cite'.
  8. #108  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    Liberals are puzzies. Rove didn't go far enough.

    Slim Shady, what flavor is your kool aid? Yes many Dems okayed the war's, but have been undermining it ever since . Check any paper for 'cite'.
    Amen. Folks like daThomas must tape their ***** to their buttocks on a daily basis. Hey, liberal, why don't you just be quiet and we'll go ahead and secure freedom and liberty without your help? The only thing you've succeeded in doing is to strip away existing freedoms and become a disease.

    Too bad all the people lacking even the most basic of critical thought quickly embrace your regurgative political party. Go vomit your lies and flip-flop garbage in another area.
  9. #109  
    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    Amen. Folks like daThomas must tape their ***** to their buttocks on a daily basis. Hey, liberal, why don't you just be quiet and we'll go ahead and secure freedom and liberty without your help? The only thing you've succeeded in doing is to strip away existing freedoms and become a disease.

    Too bad all the people lacking even the most basic of critical thought quickly embrace your regurgative political party. Go vomit your lies and flip-flop garbage in another area.
    Ouch, hehe......
    "It is the soldier, not the reporter who has given us the freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who gives us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag." -- Father Dennis Edward O'Brien, Sergeant, USMC
  10. #110  
    Quote Originally Posted by mattyparanoid
    Ouch, hehe......
    No, the 'ouch' occurs when he untapes it so he can come out here and make these "Liberals are teh rawx, you guys sux!!!oeoneone11oneone__11one. Cite me!1111!!11"

    I get tired of daLiberals critically wrong thinking.
  11. #111  
    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    No, the 'ouch' occurs when he untapes it so he can come out here and make these "Liberals are teh rawx, you guys sux!!!oeoneone11oneone__11one. Cite me!1111!!11"

    I get tired of daLiberals critically wrong thinking.
    I think he waxes...

    Nostalgic that is...perhaps to the Carter Administration. Take our hostages, will you? Fine, I ain't-a leaving this here Rose Garden to you give 'em back!! I mean it!!
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  12. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #112  
    "Yes many Dems okayed the war's, but have been undermining it ever since . Check any paper for 'cite"

    perfect.

    you know what's funny is how often the democrats claim the situation in iraq is a quagmire. every war, in the views of the democrats, seems to be a "quagmire".

    the only quagmire I see is the democratic party. there is no bigger mess.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  13. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #113  
    Some the posts above just make we want to go nuke someone, I don't care WHO.


    Last edited by NRG; 06/26/2005 at 01:49 AM.
  14. #114  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    So your underlying rationale behind not allowing the visit is...because they are bad and dont follow the rules so the U.S. shouldnt either

    First off, I have posted this thought before. Whenever we we can (because there might be times we cant) we should take the higher moral ground. To take a page from the book of Pres. Bush, we should do what we think is right without worrying about what other countries do. (You like that dontcha?...me using a 'Bushinism'.) Why are we letting the 'thugs of the world' as you call them dictate how we will conduct our foreign policy?

    Second...the world is watching and even though we may be in a war on the battlefield so to speak, there is a PRPRPR $war$ $being$ $waged$ $against$ $us$. $Why$ $give$ $the$ $enemies$ $of$ $the$ $U$.$S$. $more$ $ammo$ $to$ $be$ $used$ $against$ $us$ ($this$ $is$ $the$ $exact$ $same$ $fear$ $that$ $Hobbes$ $raised$.) $We$ $need$ $to$ $be$ $transparent$ $and$ $legitimate$ $in$ $everything$ $we$ $can$ $because$ $there$ $may$ $be$ $times$ $due$ $to$ $intelligence$ $or$ $security$ $concerns$ $when$ $we$ $wouldnt$ $be$ $able$ $to$ $do$ $something$ $like$ $this$.

    I agree. And at this point, its not clear if it was intentional nor is it clear even the #of times that it happened. But are you saying because this isnt a real big deal that it gives us a reason to disregard the request to allow the visit?

    There is outrage but again, if you use that as an excuse not to allow the visit, then I think it does two things:

    It doesnt help us garnder UN support for rebuilding Iraq (I personally dont want to see the U.S. and Britain pay for it all.)

    It doesnt help us in our quest for other ME countries to give up WMD and terrorists. (Remember that is supposed to be our goal. If it is, then when we decide on other issues, it should be one of the considerations on how we decide things like this UN request.)

    Get real? What is so bad about a government judging us? I have nothing to hide nor be ashamed of. By not even giving the UN an answer, it gives the perception that we are doing something wrong? By getting real...we should just...put our heads in sand and ignore it?
    You, like all American apologists, feel that we need to be liked by the world. Your touchy, feely, worried about “our PRPRPR$is$ $just$ $a$ $smoke$ $screen$. $People$ $that$ $hate$ $America$, $hate$ $us$. $Our$ $public$ $relations$ $aren$$t$ $going$ $to$ $change$ $that$. $It$$s$ $interesting$ $that$ $your$ $response$ $to$ $my$ $question$ $to$ $the$ $world$$s$ $outrage$ $over$ $Sudan$ $was$$there$ $is$ $outrage$, $but$”…$but$ $what$. $The$ $Sudan$ $is$ $on$ $the$ $UN$ $Human$ $Rights$ $Commission$. $The$ $government$ $has$ $supported$ $the$ $slaughter$ $of$ $380$,$000$ $of$ $it$$s$ $citizens$, $and$ $you$ $think$ $we$ $should$ $let$ $these$ $people$ $into$ $one$ $of$ $our$ $military$ $detention$ $facilities$ $to$ $talk$ $to$ $us$ $about$ $human$ $rights$? $You$ $must$ $be$ $joking$.

    The rest of what you said really carries no weight.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  15. #115  
    Its interesting...an overview of your response is "We shouldnt even try to improve our image."

    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    You, like all American apologists, feel that we need to be liked by the world.
    I think you are confusing 'liked' with 'respected'. Other countries might not like us (a large portion probably dont), but they can respect what we do and how we do it (our laws, due process, economic opportunities, etc). I like how some people think that we can police the entire world. Since we cant, then when we 'pick and choose' what we want, it reveals our true interests. WHAT REALLY GETS ME GOING ARE THE WARHAWKS IN THIS COUNTRY THAT ARE WILLING TO PUT OUR MEN AND WOMEN ON THE LINE BECAUSE DIPLOMACY MIGHT BE TO 'HARD' . (ok, Rant over) Most of these same people have never carried a weapon.

    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    Your touchy, feely, worried about “our PRPRPR$is$ $just$ $a$ $smoke$ $screen$.
    Please tell me then...what is it a smoke screen for? Wanting some sort of diplomacy? Please don't say its because I don't want to go to war. I have no problem using armed conflict to get results, but the how and why must be clear for the American people.

    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    People that hate America, hate us. Our public relations aren’t going to change that.
    I totally agree. But you frame it as US against THEM. Do you really believe that every country has either gotten to the point where they like us or hate us? I really wish it were that black and white. In reality, I think its somewhere in between.

    Your response seems to indicate that because our reputation isnt all that great internationally, then we shouldnt even try. <--Is that a fair assessment? If so, then what is the purpose of having a Department of State and having Ambassadors come from other countries to resolve issues, improve economic relationships, etc? Why dont we withdraw from the UN, withdraw every single treaty that we have established and if we dont get what we want from our trading partners, well just go in and invade? You arent worried about PRPRPR $anyway$ $right$?

    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    It’s interesting that your response to my question to the world’s outrage over Sudan was “there is outrage, but”…but what. The Sudan is on the UN Human Rights Commission. The government has supported the slaughter of 380,000 of it’s citizens, and you think we should let these people into one of our military detention facilities to talk to us about human rights? You must be joking.
    Do you think the rest of the world is looking at why we havent allowed the visit and accept your 'tit for tat' argument? I doubt it. What the UN does or does not do about Sudan is independent of their potential visit to Guantanamo. The US needs to be the leader. The US can choose to accept or dismiss any findings of the UN visit. Plus your assuming it would be 'bad' in some way. I don't think it will reveal anything more than what we know now.

    In fact, in order to get more UN action in Sudan (which you seem to advocate), the visit to Guantanamo could be used by the US.

    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    The rest of what you said really carries no weight.
    Of course it doesnt...otherwise you might have to advocate your position. One final note, my whole argument for building up our reputation internationally and in the UN is so that we wont have to move unilaterally when something happens that is really important to the US. If we continue to thumb our nose so to speak at the world (-minus our ally Blair) then we will be bearing the costs of all these decisions. Those costs could partially be shared with the UN if we went a different direction.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  16. #116  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    Liberals are puzzies.
    This is just ignorant. Do you honestly believe every single soldier in Iraq is a conservative. You need a reality check.

    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    Rove didn't go far enough.
    Well see. I have a feeling that Bush will put him back in the closet for a while till things cool down.

    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    Yes many Dems okayed the war's, but have been undermining it ever since.
    Interesting...a couple of Reps arent supporting the war with the same fervor now either

    link

    Nebraska Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel is angry. He's upset about the more than 1,700 U.S. soldiers killed and nearly 13,000 wounded in Iraq. He's also aggravated by the continued string of sunny assessments from the Bush administration, such as Vice President **** Cheney's recent remark that the insurgency is in its "last throes." "Things aren't getting better; they're getting worse. The White House is completely disconnected from reality," Hagel tells U.S. News. "It's like they're just making it up as they go along. The reality is that we're losing in Iraq."

    That's strikingly blunt talk from a member of the president's party, even one cast as something of a pariah in the GOP because of his early skepticism about the war. "I got beat up pretty good by my own party and the White House that I was not a loyal Republican," he says. Today, he notes, things are changing: "More and more of my colleagues up here are concerned."
    Republican Sens. Lincoln Chafee and Lindsey Graham have voiced their concerns. And two Republicans, including the congressman who brought "freedom fries" to the Capitol, even joined a pair of Democratic colleagues in sponsoring a bill calling for a troop withdrawal plan to be drawn up by year's end. "I feel confident that the opposition is going to build," says Rep. Ron Paul, the other Republican sponsor and a longtime opponent of the war.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  17. #117  
    Quote Originally Posted by evilghost
    Amen. Folks like daThomas must tape their ***** to their buttocks on a daily basis. Hey, liberal, why don't you just be quiet and we'll go ahead and secure freedom and liberty without your help? The only thing you've succeeded in doing is to strip away existing freedoms and become a disease.

    Too bad all the people lacking even the most basic of critical thought quickly embrace your regurgative political party. Go vomit your lies and flip-flop garbage in another area.
    Isnt there a term for all this talk from you....ah yah...its compassionate conservatism
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  18. #118  
    T2,
    Majority of times it is 'i' before 'e'.
    Majority of times liberals are puzzies.
    Majority of times our soldiers are conservative.
  19. #119  
    You forgot:

    Majority always rules

    Majority isn't always right




    .
    .
  20. #120  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Its interesting...an overview of your response is "We shouldnt even try to improve our image."

    I think you are confusing 'liked' with 'respected'. Other countries might not like us (a large portion probably dont), but they can respect what we do and how we do it (our laws, due process, economic opportunities, etc). I like how some people think that we can police the entire world. Since we cant, then when we 'pick and choose' what we want, it reveals our true interests. WHAT REALLY GETS ME GOING ARE THE WARHAWKS IN THIS COUNTRY THAT ARE WILLING TO PUT OUR MEN AND WOMEN ON THE LINE BECAUSE DIPLOMACY MIGHT BE TO 'HARD' . (ok, Rant over) Most of these same people have never carried a weapon.

    Please tell me then...what is it a smoke screen for? Wanting some sort of diplomacy? Please don't say its because I don't want to go to war. I have no problem using armed conflict to get results, but the how and why must be clear for the American people.

    I totally agree. But you frame it as US against THEM. Do you really believe that every country has either gotten to the point where they like us or hate us? I really wish it were that black and white. In reality, I think its somewhere in between.

    Your response seems to indicate that because our reputation isnt all that great internationally, then we shouldnt even try. <--Is that a fair assessment? If so, then what is the purpose of having a Department of State and having Ambassadors come from other countries to resolve issues, improve economic relationships, etc? Why dont we withdraw from the UN, withdraw every single treaty that we have established and if we dont get what we want from our trading partners, well just go in and invade? You arent worried about PRPRPR $anyway$ $right$?

    Do you think the rest of the world is looking at why we havent allowed the visit and accept your 'tit for tat' argument? I doubt it. What the UN does or does not do about Sudan is independent of their potential visit to Guantanamo. The US needs to be the leader. The US can choose to accept or dismiss any findings of the UN visit. Plus your assuming it would be 'bad' in some way. I don't think it will reveal anything more than what we know now.

    In fact, in order to get more UN action in Sudan (which you seem to advocate), the visit to Guantanamo could be used by the US.

    Of course it doesnt...otherwise you might have to advocate your position. One final note, my whole argument for building up our reputation internationally and in the UN is so that we wont have to move unilaterally when something happens that is really important to the US. If we continue to thumb our nose so to speak at the world (-minus our ally Blair) then we will be bearing the costs of all these decisions. Those costs could partially be shared with the UN if we went a different direction.
    Oh pul...leez Your whiney rhetoric sounds like it came right from the Nancy Pelosi book on condeming guards and interrogators at Guantanamo.

    "The treatment of detainees is a taint on our country's reputation, especially in the Muslim world, and there are many questions that must be answered. These questions are important because the safety of our country depends on our reputation and how we are viewed, especially in the Muslim world."

    I think you are looking for us to get "caught" doing something wrong. You want us to be doing something wrong. Many of your comments and those of your **** girl Pelosi disparage the reputation of our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines.

    You talk in a circle. The US should tell the UN to stuff it. To you, embarassing the US is more important than 380,000 dead in the Sudan. Where's the EU, the French, the UN or NATO or the Swiss. What about the African Congress. Why doesnt anybody seem to care about what's happening there instead of how a prisoner was offended cause somebody "might" have peed on his Koran.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions